Messianic Kingdom

To my way of understanding, Heaven is God’s Kingdom. The Old Covenant kingdom of Israel was an earthly copy or representation of God’s Heavenly Kingdom, patterned after it, even down to the courts of the Temple and the Holy of Holies representing the courts of Heaven and the throne of God. That’s why when Jesus was crucified and the veil in the Temple was rent it indicated that the way into the presence of God had been opened. That was an earthly sign of a very powerful spiritual event that had taken place, in the heavenlies. There were many other such earthly signs of very powerful things taking place in the spirit during the generation of Jesus’ coming.

That wasn’t the question. The question was what would have happened if Jerusalem had accepted Jesus? And my answer was that had they understood who Jesus was, they would not have crucified him: “But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” 1 Corinthians 2:7-8 And without the crucifixion, there would be no salvation. I didn’t say it was possible for that to happen, but rather I pointed out that God had prevented that possibility by blinding them so they could not see who Jesus was. So let me ask you a question . . . in what way exactly did God blind the Jews?

Again, as I said, if Jerusalem had accepted Jesus before his crucifixion, they would not have crucified him, and there would be no salvation. But God blinded them so that His salvation might be accomplished.

If Jerusalem had accepted Jesus after his resurrection, a lot more Jews would have been saved.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

I suppose since you don't believe in a "literal Kingdom" here on earth with Jesus living/reigning in/from Jerusalem,

You wouldn't recognize any differences between Jesus ruling a "Spiritual Kingdom Of God" and ruling "literally" over a "kingdom of Heaven".

Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.

9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

 

If God is not willing for any to perish, amd Jesus told Israel, "I would, you wouldn't",

Did God blind Israel or did they blind themselves???

You'll have to keep "everything" in "CONTEXT" before you can understand the situation.

 

Oh, absolutely, God blinded the Jews. No question about it:

“What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day.” Romans 11:7-8

It definitely was God who blinded the Jews. And the reason he blinded them is exactly as you said, because had they understood what the Law and the Prophets were foretelling about the coming of the Messiah, they would have recognized Jesus and would not have crucified him. So in order that the atoning work of Calvary might be accomplished, God blinded them and the plan of salvation unfolded exactly as it had been ordained before the world began. We are in total agreement on that.

So the question remains, exactly how did God blind them?

I believe I have a pretty good grasp of the situation, perhaps in part because the context in which I view all these things is the context of my first love, the Gospel, let the eschatology chips fall where they may. After all, the whole Bible is really all about the Gospel, foreshadowed through the types and symbols of the Law, as well as preached by the object lessons of all the events of Old Testament times, from the creation right on through to the remnant of Jews who returned from Babylon and rebuilt Jerusalem in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. It's all about the Gospel, so that's the context, the "light" in which we have to look at the Law, and the Prophets. Forgetting that is the first step into error.



The insistence on the primacy of the Gospel in all matters is the reason I am a Southern Baptist! And as long as the Southern Baptists remain faithful to our First Love, I will remain faithful to the Southern Baptists.


In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

If God blinded Israel why did Jesus accuse them of rejecting him, "I would, you wouldn't"???

Jesus accused Israel of "closing their eyes/ears/hearts" to his message.

Was Jesus's offer against the "will of God"??

You won't understand the situation until you understand that an "Alternate outcome" was "possible".

 

How do you expect to understand the scriptures when you reject so much of it???

 

It seems to me that if you would give even a little thought to the question I have asked, maybe just look up a few verses, then you wouldn’t have even asked that question. But I'll continue to answer your questions: No. Jesus’ offer of salvation to the Jews was not contrary to the will of God, it was the will of God.

The situation the Jews were in is that Jesus was nothing like what they had thought the Messiah would be like, and Jesus did nothing like what they thought the Messiah would do, and nothing turned out quite the way they had thought the Messiah’s coming would turn out. Their expectations were all about a literal messianic kingdom, based on a very literal interpretation of the Old Testament, an interpretation which proved to be a real stumbling block to them. The Jew was/is therefore in the same position as Gentiles, of having to accept that Jesus is the Messiah by faith, without all the proofs the Rabbis had taught them to expect, all those earthly blessings the Rabbis taught would accompany the coming of the Messiah. It is these very same literal, earthy proofs . . . or rather, the lack of them, that keeps so many Jews from being saved to this very day. Their own interpretation of the Old Testament has turned out to be the source of their blindness to the Cross of Christ. And that same blindness still remains on the vast majority of Jews. Even in our own day there is only a remnant of the Jewish people who follow Christ. Bottom line, the Cross was actually quite revolutionary to the Jews of Jesus’ day, and to many of those who are still blinded by their vision of what the Messiah’s coming and kingdom is supposed to mean, the Cross of Christ has become anathema. But what is worse is that so many Christians are becoming subject to the same blindness, and for the same reason . . . reading the Word of God according to the letter, rather than the spirit. So that even Christians are beginning to envision a literal kingdom that is in truth nothing more than a reestablishment of the Old Covenant and the reinstitution of the Law, including the sacrificial system . . . in effect denying the New Covenant which Scripture clearly teaches fulfilled and replaced the Old.

If you refer to an alternate outcome to the Cross, I quite disagree. Although we might speak of it being possible theoretically, in terms of reality, God was in control all along and everything that happened came to pass exactly as God had ordained. The Jews were blinded by God for that very purpose, and only those whose hearts turn to the Lord, in faith, without the evidence of their eyes, will have their blindness lifted.

“But if the (Old Covenant) ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, be glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the (New Covenant) ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of death be glory, much more much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of that glory which excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remainth is glorious. See then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same inage from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” 2 Corinthians 3:7-18

And a second witness:

“What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for, but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day. And David said, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them: Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their backs always.” Romans 11:7-10

The “table of the Lord” refers literally to the common communal table in one of the Priests chambers of the Temple at which the priests on duty took their meals of various portions of all the offerings and sacrifices which God had provided in the Law for their maintenance so that His priests might serve Him with gladness. In keeping with truth being stranger than fiction, the Lord’s Table, or the communal table where the priests ate during their service in the Temple, was a banquet feast, with abundant roasts of lamb and beef and breads and cheeses and a sampling of all the various grains and vegetables that were offered with portions of wine and water from the drink offerings. These stores were plundered by the Zealots shortly before the siege of Jerusalem and was marked by the Rabbis as one of the signs that the Temple was doomed. But in symbolic language, the “table of the Lord” referred in a broader sense to all those things which God provided in the Law of Moses for the life and fellowship of His people, so that in this verse where Paul quotes Psalm 69:22 he uses it as an allegorical reference to these provisions of the Law having become a trap and a snare that blinded the Jews so that they might be bowed down under the weight of the yoke of the Law for ever.

But for those Jews whose hearts turn in faith to the Lord by the preaching of the Gospel, the vail is taken away and they too see what is the true glory of the Messiah and His Kingdom . . . the Cross.

At least, that’s the situation as I see it.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

When you consider that:

the wise men came looking for Jesus 30 years before he started preaching,

and Herod killed all babies 2 years under, attempting to kill Jesus,

Lazarus resurrected, all sick healed.

Jesus said they could read the sign of the sky, but not the signs of the "TIMES",

The priest "leasing" out spaces in the temple to money changers, people who sold animals for "sacrifices",

Making long prayer in public to be seen of men,

and the priest afraid Roman would "take away their place" of authority, and profit, if they didn't stop Jesus,

You see that it wasn't God who blinded them, but them blinding themselves, and anyone who listen to them.

It was no different back then than it is today, people are still trying to make a profit off "religion", and people still prefer to listen/believe man, rather than "God". (Jesus)

God (Jesus) would have preferred that Israel become the "light of the world", rather than the "Gentiles",

Jesus was only sent to the Jews, but when they rejected him, he went to the "Gentiles".

 

I’m sorry but I’m afraid I don’t see that at all. None of your comments support the idea that Israel’s blindness was self-induced, rather than the work of God. And I think to put forth that kind of doctrine, you really need some very strong, direct testimony of the Scripture that makes that case. Especially because you have to counter what I think is direct testimony that lays out the opposite case, that God blinded Israel, and further, these verses tell us how He blinded them, and even why He blinded them, but even further they tell us what is required for their blind eyes and deaf ears to be opened.

Let me ask you a question. Where did the Gentiles get the Gospel?

I disagree. Jesus never went to the Gentiles. Except for a very brief sojourn in Egypt when he was only a few weeks old, Jesus never left Palestine. It was his Jewish church that he sent to the Gentiles, and even to this very day, every Gentile that is saved and added to the church is saved by the testimony of Jews, through whom the light of the world has come, speaking both literally of the incarnation of Christ and spiritually of the Gospel of Christ. And not only have the Gentiles been brought nigh to God through the preaching of Jews, but daily the “Gentile” church is fed and grows in knowledge and grace by the inspired writings of Jews. Seems to me the true light of God in this world is these Jews . . .

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

Jesus's offer, I would, you wouldn't, them closing their eyes/ears to his message clearly was not the "work of God", else Jesus could not have blamed them.

Jews won't believe without "Signs and wonders", which Jesus wouldn't give, save Jonas.

The plan is by "FAITH", rather than literal "Signs and wonders".

Mt 27:42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.

Do you know that the "Samaritans" were of the tribe of "EPHRAIM", son of "Joseph" (prefigure of Jesus)

Joh 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

Joh 4:12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob,


Ephrain was prophesied to be the father of a "multitude of nations". (Gentiles)

Ge 48:17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head.

18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head.

19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.

Of the 144000 sealed in Revelation/during the trib, you'll find the tribe of "DAN" replaced by Manasseh, but you won't find the tribe of "Ephraim" because they represent the Gentile Church which is raptured "Pre trib".

The "Samaritan Woman" represents (prefigures) the Gentiles church or "Bride of Christ".